Tips from the reviewers' point of view (personal) Masao Saito - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Tips from the reviewers' point of view (personal) Masao Saito (NAOJ: TMT-J Project Office)

Reference • Updated ALMA Principles of the ALMA Proposal Review Process • https://almascience.nao.ac.jp/documents-and-tools/cycle5/alma- proposal-review-process) • Userʼs Guide to the East Asian ALMA Regional Center (EA- ARC) • https://almascience.nao.ac.jp/documents-and-tools/cycle5/alma- ea-arcguide • ALMA Cycle 5: Selection Statistics • https://almascience.nao.ac.jp/news/documents-and- tools/cycle5/alma-cycle5-stats 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 2

How to deliver message is 90 %. • There is a book entitled “how to deliver message is 90 %”. • More than one million copies have been sold. <= people want to deliver message to listeners, but they sometimes do not correctly understand. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 3

How to deliver message is 90 %. • There is a book entitled “how to deliver message is 90 %. • More than one million copies have been sold. <= PIs want to deliver message to assessors, but they sometimes do not correctly understand. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 4

Who are Science Assessors (reveiwers)? • ALMA programs are selected through competitive peer review. • The reviewers consist of scientists selected from the international astronomical community. • The reviewers are assigned to individual ALMA Review Panels (ARPs) that are specialized in a scientific category. • The ALMA Proposal Review Committee (APRC) consists of the chairs of each ARP and a Chair, who is selected from the international community by the ALMA Director. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 5

Science Merit • The primary criteria to rank all proposals are the overall scientific merit of the proposed investigation and their potential contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 6

Who are Actual Science Assessors? • The reviewers consist of scientists selected from the international astronomical community including EA (Japan, Korea, and Taiwan). • They are not 100 % pure assessors. They have duty work, education, their own research, admin, and management. They volunteer to review 80-100 proposals in a few weeks. • The APR meeting is away from the first round. They have to remember the proposals in a short time. • Past reviewersʼ name can be found in Cycle X statistic doc. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 7

ALMA Proposal Category 1. Cosmology and the high redshift universe 2. Galaxies and galactic nuclei 3. ISM, star formation and astrochemistry 4. Circumstellar disks, exoplanets and the solar system 5. Stellar evolution and the Sun Sometimes a reviewer may have to read proposals far from his/her specialty (e.g Category 4 and 5) 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 8

Ideal Transfer Function Ideas, importance, impact …. Science Proposer Assessor Your interest 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 9

Realistic Transfer Function (Filter) SA may receive skewed message through two filters. Ideas, importance, impact …. Science SA Proposer filter Assessor filter Background, interest Stress, interest.. Refereeʼs focus Your interest 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 10

Realistic Transfer Function (Filter) Cut unnecessary information Ideas, importance, impact …. Science SA Proposer filter Assessor filter Background, interest Stress, interest.. SAʼs focus Your interest 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 11

Referees would like to know • What is an unresolved issue in your field? • Is it important or does it make a big impact in the field? • Why has it not been addressed before? • How will you address it with ALMA (in unique or original ways)? 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 12

Good example: Conflicting scenarios • Two contradict scenarios in your field • Each scenario expects different observation outcome ideally quantitatively (supported by simulated observations) • ALMA capability enables one to separate one scenario from the other. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 13

Bad example: just do it • We have low resolution data. • We need high spatial resolution. • We can see something interesting. Descriptive Proposals are usually not highly rated 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 14

Tips: Figure 10” 7 pc 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 15

Ask appropriate time if needed 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 16

TIPS • Prior to the meetings, all written science comments and grades will have been filled in and made available to the panels. • First stage: manage to pass the first-cut triage because no further review is performed. • Second stage: Expertsʼ comments (frequently Primary Assessor) are well taken in the ARP meeting. • You have to persuade non-experts in some sense as well as experts. Worth asking your colleagues in different fields to read your proposals in advance. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 17

Summary • Understand review process • Your proposal should outstand among similar proposals. • Think about the science assessors who have heavy load and may have different interest. • Deliver a clear story to assessors. 2018/4/4 ALMA Cycle 6 Proposal Workshop 18